Stereoscopic perception with brief exposures

In this report we describe the results of an experiment in which we demonstrated that a powerful and compelling stereoscopic experience is elicited with very brief (< 1 msec) stimulus durations. The observers were highly successful in recognizing briefly flashed, stereoscopic, random-dot surfaces in the absence of monocular contours. The results are shown to be closely related to the range of depths for any stimulus form; however, the recognition thresholds were nonmonotonic as a function of disparity. Previous investigators have disagreed about the existence of a temporal threshold for stereopsis. We believe that prior findings suggesting that stereopsis cannot occur at short exposure durations are probably due to inadequate control of fixation disparity. Therefore, there is poor dichoptic image registration when a stereoscopic stimulus is presented. The present results also raise difficulties for any theory of stereopsis that requires eye movements.     

Binocular rivalry and stereoscopic depth perception

An investigation was made of stimulus factors causing retinal rivalry or allowing stereoscopic depth perception, given a requisite positional disparity. It is shown that similar colour information can be “filtered” out from both eyes; that stereopsis is not incompatible with rivalry and suppression of one aspect of the stimulus, and that the strongest cue for perception of stereoscopic depth is intensity difference at the boundaries of the figures in the same direction at each eye. Identity of colour can also act as a cue for stereopsis. The brightness of different monocular figures seen in the stereoscope in different combinations was estimated by a matching technique, and it is suggested that the perceived brightness is a compromise between the monocular brightness difference between figure and ground seen in relation to the binocular fused background, and the mean brightness of the figures. The results are discussed in terms of neurophysiological “on,” “off” and continuous response fibres.     

Temporal integration differences between crossed and uncrossed stereoscopic mechanisms

In this study, we investigated temporal integration of disparity information for crossed and uncrossed stereopsis. Across three experiments, exposure duration thresholds were measured for stereoscopic stimuli created from dynamic random-dot stereograms. In Experiment 1, an investigation of disparity detection showed that detection thresholds were equal for the crossed and uncrossed directions. In Experiment 2, an examination of duration limits for depth perception showed that critical durations were lower, and depth more veridical, for crossed depth than for uncrossed depth. In Experiment 3, an investigation of depth discrimination revealed that discrimination thresholds were lower for crossed depth than for uncrossed depth. These results suggest that crossed and uncrossed mechanisms differ in terms of their temporal integration properties at processing levels involving the computation and discrimination of depth.     

Assessment of depth perception in cats

A behavioural method is described for the assessment of depth perception of kittens. Measurement is made of the smallest separation in depth that can be discriminated between two adjacent stimuli under both monocular and binocular viewing conditions. Normal animals can discriminate much smaller separations in depth when using two eyes than with monocular viewing, implying the presence of a cue to depth that is uniquely available with binocular viewing. The test provides a quick and reliable way of screening animals for stereopsis.     

Purely chromatic perception of motion in depth: two eyes as sensitive as one

Motion hyperacuity (phase) thresholds were measured for both lateral and stereoscopic oscillatory motion in both luminance and equiluminant red/green gratings of 2 cycles per degree. Thresholds for lateral chromatic motion did not exhibit the inhibitory fall-off at low temporal frequencies that was found for luminance motion. Phase thresholds for purely chromatic motion were substantially higher than those for luminance gratings, in proportion to the ratio of cone signal modulation, but they could be predicted from the corresponding contrast sensitivities for both types of stimulus. Stereomovement thresholds in luminance gratings showed the stereomovement suppression effect relative to monocular motion sensitivity previously reported for line stimuli, but purely chromatic gratings did not. Together with the lack of an inhibitory fall-off, these results imply that chromatic and luminance motion are processed by different neural pathways, and that the chrominance pathway is capable of supporting a strong percept of stereoscopic motion from purely chromatic gratings.     

Form and depth in global stereopsis

Three experiments were performed to investigate the role of vergence and the relationship between form and depth processes in global steropsis by comparing global and classical stereopsis. In the first experiment, the speed of stereoscopic resolution as a function of initial fixation-target distance was measured to discover the role of vergence in stereopsis with the random-dot and contoured stereograms. In the second experiment, the accuracy of form and depth discrimination as a function of fixation-target distance was measured using brief stimulus exposure (150 ms) to examine the nature of form and depth processing in global stereopsis. In the third experiment, the speed of resolving random-dot stereograms in the presence or absence of juxtaposed contoured stereograms was observed to examine the interaction of global stereopsis and classical stereopsis. The conclusions of these studies are summarized as follows: First, vergence plays a critical role in the solution of the random-dot stereograms but not in the solution of contoured stereograms. Second, performance with the contoured stereograms is better than with the random-dot stereograms in terms of both speed and accuracy. Third, in random-dot stereograms, discrimination of form is independent of and more accurate than discrimination of depth. Fourth, again for random-dot stereograms, the disparity of target relative to fixation systematically affects discrimination of form but not discrimination of depth. Fifth, a rapid reduction in reaction time over practice occurs for both types of stereograms. Finally, strong interference with the solution of the random-dot stereograms by the monocular contour occurs when the two kinds of stimuli are present simultaneously.     

Some observations and measurements of the Panum phenomenon

The angular separation between the “binocular” and the “monocular” line of Panum’s limiting case was systematically varied under conditions in which the changes in seen relative depth could be quantified. Stereoscopic, equidistant, and anomalous depth localizations were seen. A criterion of variability of depth localization was utilized to differentiate the mechanism operative in determining the seen depth. When stereopsis is clearly present, depth in Panum’s limiting case is predictable and reveals a one-to-one relationship with the angle of lateral separation of the stereoscopic stimuli, i.e., the odd line cooperates in free binocular vision with both of the paired lines to give “true” stereoscopic depth. The range of angular separation over which Panum’s limiting case will give rise to stereoscopic depth is increased by free eye movements well beyond the usually reported limits of Panum’s retinal areas.     

Patent stereopsis with diplopia in random-dot stereograms

Fusional limits for an RD (random-dot) stereogram with overall horizontal retinal disparity due to the temporalward pulling of its two constituent RD patterns beyond the divergence limits of the eyes have been determined by using an afterimage method. Two criteria for fusion were used, viz, the perception ofsingle local RD elements and the perception of stereoscopic depth in the “hidden” square of side 1.38 deg with 8-min relative horizontal disparity. The diplopia thresholds were found to be in the range of 0.15–0.3 deg, and hence do not exceed the “classical” upper limit of about 0.3 deg, which has been reported for elementary line stereograms. The stereoscopic limits were found to be in the range of 0.5–1.3 deg, which is compatible with the precision of patent stereopsis from double images which has been reported for elementary line stereograms. The results of the present third look at the experiments performed by Fender and Julesz (1967) suggest that there are no special neuronal processes raising the fusional limits for RD stereograms above those for elementary line stereograms. Previous claims that such special neuronal processes may occur seem to be based on an evaluation of fusional limits obtained with different criteria for fusion. It is further argued that the major hysteresis effect that has been observed for fusional limits for RD stereograms should not be ascribed to a raising of the classical size of the diplopia threshold due to special neuronal processes initiated by RD stereograms, but to a lowering of the classical limits of patent stereopsis from double images due to the increased difficulty of solving the correspondence problem in RD stereograms.     

Do background luminances interact during binocular fusion?

The question investigated in the experiments reported here was whether monocular background luminances sum during binocular fusion. Fusion was made explicit by using a random-dot stereogram (RDS) as a background stimulus. In the presence of the RDS, differential luminance thresholds were somewhat higher than in the uniform field: a full-field, binocular dot array acted as a mask for a full-field luminance change, but global depth had no effect at threshold. The amount of the binocular advantage at threshold was compared to the basic "threshold response," that is, the change in threshold resulting from raising the background luminance by a factor of 2. It was found that the amount of the binocular advantage was equivalent, on the average, to some 75% of the threshold response--significantly less than the 100% predicted by "simple summation." The amount of the binocular advantage varied substantially among observers and eyes, whereas the threshold response obeyed Weber's law in all cases: the variability was eye-, rather than threshold-dependent. Monocular thresholds did not decrease when taken with the nontest eye occluded rather than viewing a fused background. The proposition that the adaptation state of the visual system is increased during binocular fusion (Cogan, 1982) was not supported. Yet occluding the nontest eye, rather than presenting the test stimulus monocularly against a fused background, did change monocular thresholds in some eyes and observers. These findings are interpreted as evidence for a complex binocular background interaction involving both summation and inhibition.     

Temporal integration of monocular images separated in time: stereopsis, stereoacuity, and binocular luster

We evaluated stereopsis and binocular luster using electronically controlled shutter glasses with alternating monocular stimulation. In Experiment 1, we used the standard method for testing stereoacuity to obtain a gradual measure of stereopsis. Stereo thresholds decreased with increasing alternating frequency of two monocular half-images without a delay between them. Increasing delays led to increasing thresholds. In Experiment 2, we compared stereopsis resulting from two monocular half-images of a random-dot stereogram and binocular luster with respect to the minimum alternating frequency of the two half-images and the maximum interocular delay that were tolerated without a breakdown of the impression. Below 3 Hz, no stereopsis occurred. Binocular luster was observed only above 10 Hz. The mean threshold of interocular delay for detecting the global figure in a random-dot stereogram was about 51 msec, but for binocular luster it was about 20 msec. Overall, temporal integration was better for stereopsis than for binocular luster.     

The depth and selectivity of suppression in binocular rivalry

Binocular rivalry occurs when the two eyes are presented with incompatible stimuli and the perceived image alternates between the two stimuli. The aim of this study was to find out whether the periodic perceptual loss of a monocular stimulus during binocular rivalry is mirrored by a comparable loss of contrast sensitivity. We presented brief test stimuli to one eye while its conditioning stimulus was dominant or suppressed. The test stimuli were varied widely across four stimulus domains--namely, the relative stimulation of medium- and long-wavelength-sensitive cones, duration, spatial frequency, and grating orientation. The result in each case was the same. Suppression depended slightly or not at all on the type of test stimulus, and contrast sensitivity during suppression was around 64% of that during dominance. The effect of suppression on sensitivity is therefore very weak, relative to its effect on the perceived image. Furthermore, suppression was largely independent of the similarity between the conditioning and the test stimuli, indicating that our results are better explained by eye suppression than by stimulus suppression. A model is presented to account for the small, monocular sensitivity loss during suppression: It assumes that test detection precedes conditioning stimulus perception in the visual pathway.     

Orientation discrimination across the visual field: size estimates near contrast threshold

Performance in detection and discrimination tasks can often be made equal across the visual field through appropriate stimulus scaling. The parameter E2 is used to characterize the rate at which stimulus dimensions (e.g., size or contrast) must increase in order to achieve foveal levels of performance. We calculated both size and contrast E2 values for orientation discrimination using a spatial scaling procedure that involves measuring combination size and contrast thresholds for stimuli with constant size-to-contrast ratios. E2 values for size scaling were 5.77 degrees and 5.92 degrees. These values are three to four times larger than those recovered previously using similar stimuli at contrasts well above detection threshold (Sally & Gurnsey, 2003). E2 values for contrast scaling were 324.2 degrees and 44.3 degrees, indicating that for large stimuli little contrast scaling (.3% to 2.3% increase) was required in order to equate performance in the fovea and the largest eccentricity (10 degrees). A similar pattern of results was found using a spatial scaling method that involves measuring contrast thresholds for target identification as a function of size across eccentricities. We conclude that the size scaling for orientation discrimination at near-threshold stimulus contrasts is much larger than that required at suprathreshold contrasts. This may arise, at least in part, from contrast-dependent changes in mechanisms that subserve task performance.     

Positional acuity without monocular cues

The accuracy with which human observers can determine the spatial location of a shape boundary was measured by vernier alignment. The vernier targets were presented as random-dot stereograms, with varying amounts of camouflage in the monocular image. Camouflage decreased vernier acuity, but when the camouflage was broken by stereoscopic disparity, acuity was improved. In the limiting case when the shape boundaries were defined by disparity information alone, vernier thresholds (75% correct, binary forced-choice) were in the region of 40 s visual angle. This is poor acuity in comparison to vernier thresholds with monocular contour, but if the limited resolution acuity for stereopsis is taken into account, cyclopean and monocular positional acuities can be considered quite similar in relation to their respective resolution limits.     

Temporal properties of disparity processing revealed by dynamic random-dot stereograms

In studies of the temporal flexibility of the stereoscopic system, it has been suggested that two different processes of binocular depth perception could be responsible for the flexibility: tolerance for interocular delays and temporal integration of correlation. None has investigated the relationship between tolerance for delays and temporal integration mechanisms and none has revealed which mechanism is responsible for depth perception in dynamic random-dot stereograms. We address these questions in the present study. Across five experiments, we investigated the temporal properties of stereopsis by varying interocular correlation as a function of time in controlled ways. We presented different types of dynamic random-dot stereograms, each consisting of two pairs of alternating random-dot patterns. Our experimental results demonstrate that (i) disparities from simultaneous monocular inputs dominate those from interocular delayed inputs; (ii) stereopsis is limited by temporal properties of monocular luminance mechanisms; and (iii) depth perception in dynamic random-dot stereograms results from cross-correlation-like operation on two simultaneous monocular inputs that represent the retinal images after having been subjected to a process of monocular temporal integration of luminance.     

Monocular occlusion impairs stereoscopic acuity,but total visual deprivation does not

Wallach and Karsh (1963) reported that 24 h of monocular occlusion leads to a significant deterioration of stereoscopic depth estimates and attributed this phenomenon to “disuse.” We designed an apparatus for testing stereoscopic accuracy which eliminated all cues to depth save binocular disparity. With it, we tested the relative effect of 8 h of monocular—;as opposed to binocular—;occlusion on subsequent stereoscopic performance. Monocular patching led to significant increases in mean standard deviation and in mean absolute error as compared to baseline testing. Binocular patching led to no such impairment. Thus, truedisuse (such as occurs during binocular deprivation) did not impair stereopsis, whereas monocular occlusion, which may involve temporarymisuse of the stereoscopic system, did.     

Effect of stimulus duration on stereo and vernier displacement thresholds

Stereo and vernier thresholds were determined as a function of stimulus duration in both misalignment and displacement paradigms. All four thresholds increase as stimulus duration decreases. The increase is greatest for the stereo displacement threshold, less for the vernier displacement threshold, and least for the misalignment thresholds. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that depth signals are averaged over time.     

Backward recognition masking as a general type of interference in needed poststimulus processing

Auditory backward recognition masking (ABRM) has been argued to reflect interference in the storage and/or processing of a short-lived sensory form of information and has been viewed as a relatively invariant attribute of auditory pitch processing for very brief stimuli that are minimally separated in frequency (DeltaF). In contrast, the present study demonstrates that ABRM reflects interference with several basic principles of auditory processing. Measured in terms of target tone duration, rather than DeltaF, ABRM is demonstrated for target stimuli representing the interval of a musical fifth and masker-target stimulus intervals of a musical third, with thresholds ranging from approximately 22 to 55 msec and psychometric functions that are indicative of more than one contributing factor. On the basis of common underlying principles, the possibility that the threshold for the identification of temporal order of onset reflects ABRM and possible implications for the perception of complex stimuli, including speech, are discussed.     

Binocular contrast interactions in two-frame motion discrimination

Previous studies have shown that two-frame motion detection thresholds are elevated if one frame's contrast is raised, despite the increase in average contrast--the "contrast paradox". In this study, we investigated if such contrast interactions occurred at a monocular or binocular site of visual processing. Two-frame motion direction discrimination thresholds were measured for motion frames that were presented binocularly, dichoptically or interocularly. Thresholds for each presentation condition were measured for motion frames that comprised either matched or unmatched contrasts. The results showed that contrast mechanisms producing the contrast paradox combine contrast signals from both eyes prior to motion computation. Furthermore, the results are consistent with the existence of monocular and binocular contrast gain control mechanisms that coexist either as combined or independent systems.